• Khursheed Haider and Michael R Pinsky.
• Crit Care. 2013 Feb 18; 17 (1): 304.

BackgroundThe timing and indications for surgical intervention to prevent systemic embolism in infective endocarditis (IE) remain controversial. This trial compares clinical outcomes of early surgery and conventional treatment in patients with IE.Methods ResultsThirty-seven patients were assigned to the early-surgery group (<48 hours), whereas 39 were assigned to conventional therapy. Of the 39 randomly assigned to conventional therapy, 27 patients (77%) underwent surgery during the initial hospitalization and three during follow-up. One patient (3%) in the early-surgery group and nine (23%) in the conventional-treatment group reached the primary endpoint (hazard ratio (HR) 0.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01 to 0.82; P = 0.03). There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality at 6 months in the early-surgery and conventional-treatment groups (3% and 5%, respectively; HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.66; P = 0.59). The rates of the composite endpoint of death from any cause, embolic events, or recurrence of IE at 6 months were 3% in the early-surgery group and 28% in the conventional-treatment group (HR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.65; P = 0.02).ConclusionsEarly surgery in patients with IE and large vegetations significantly reduced the composite endpoint of death from any cause and embolic events by effectively decreasing the risk of systemic embolism.

8 keywords...

hide…